@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
avoiding to impeach Trump just so that you don't get Pence as the next President. I assume Pence would be a President implementing policies that are as unacceptable and therefore on its own probably impeachable.

But really, I don't understand the stuff of impeachment regulations and laws and don't want to say anything anymore. I do think all of it will "resolve" itself, because the real chaos will develop in Europe, as it has been in the past century, and then we have a replay of the 1900 to 1945.

All of it is beyond my paygrade and I'll just let it go and see what happens.

#3.1.2 The idea that the U.S. would ever impeach both a President and a Vice President is highly unlikely, unless both men/women were found complicit in the same scandal, and even then it would be highly unlikely, because we have to preserve appearances--and also have to preserve political stability (by which they mean, we can't let it look like the corruption is widespread or the system will lose credibility).

Anyway, in the case of Pence, it would never happen because there is no support from the CIA and the rest of the military industrial folks for impeaching Pence. Neither is there any support for impeaching him from the Republican politicians, who would like to be rid of Trump if they could do so without ruining their credibility with Republican voters. The only reason Trump's impeachment is being discussed--in a country where George W. Bush's impeachment was summarily rendered unthinkable in a hot second--is that the Deep State doesn't want him there. The Deep State has, as far as I can see, no problem whatever with Mike Pence.

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
if it were a democracy you had ways of getting rid of unwanted representatives without having to engage in a military coup. And who can be a President and Commander in Chief in one person and engage in a coup against himself?

Ok, I give up. I don't care anymore. It makes me sick thinking about it. And I need to stay healthy.

Thanks for trying to make it clear to me.

#3.1.2 Perhaps the real point here is that I can't impeach anyone, and neither can any of us ordinary voters and non-voters. Only politicians can do that, and they are all deeply corrupt. Anybody who thinks they are trying to impeach Trump because he's a bad man is smoking something I wish I had.

Like I said, nobody considered impeaching George Bush for more than a second.

@Alligator Ed

Well, considering the degree of homelessness, those newspapers might be getting saved as blankets for some future move to a park bench...

Seriously, I think lonely old ladies with a herd of cats probably take strays in so that they don't die on the streets as feral and unloved animals. If there were better spay/neuter programs, more independent landlords (rather than investment firms running running rentals they don't actually want people living in as homes with a pet), and a better economy so that more people could afford to keep pets, I suspect that tales of elderly women with their homes carpeted with cats would be more rare.

And I'd think it related to compassion, rather than greed. Much as people who'd survived the Depression and for the rest of their lives hoarded food did so out of fear for the future, rather than greed.

Actually, the only time I can recall reading about anyone killed by hoarded bundled newspapers was reading a book entitled My Brother's Keeper, involving (by the end of the book) two elderly brothers who'd been driven mildly mad due to circumstance and they were, indeed, hoarders. Or at least the one not blind was.

The examples you mentioned weren't taking from anyone else to enrich themselves, just keeping what mattered to them.

Personally, I have several boxes of things belonging to my parents which matter to no-one outside the family and rather a lot of boxes of paintings and (mostly) books, some of which came from one of the family manor houses, including books which have been in the family for up to two centuries or a bit over. They're not valuable in a monetary sense, but they matter to me and give me a sense of history and continuity, even if I'm usually scared to keep them out long enough to read them, in case the dog eats or paws them.

So, I personally hoard books which, while unlikely to fall on anyone, give me a great and handy reading supply and you'd have to fight me to take them away. I will defend the right to hoard and would never rely entirely upon an internet for reading matter where there is no physical presence and a power outage can leave you twiddling your thumbs by candlelight.

And I suspect that's related to part of the manufactured campaign about !!!people hoarding!!! that sprang up some years ago, to encourage people to throw away useful objects and buy new as needed, assuming one could afford them. (Not very 'green', either.)

Certain companies in polluting industries (in which I include the intertwined asbestos/petrochemical companies) have had old confidential documents, found in attics and the like, used against them in court discovery as proof of such as that they and their insurers knew they were killing workers, consumers and passers-by way back when. If that had been only on the internet, (if it existed at the time) it could have been disposed of where no-one would even know to look for it. History can be effectively erased or made darned near impossible to find, if not in concrete and accessible form. As we're seeing increasingly occur now.

So, there was a sudden burst of anti-hoarding shows (which my brother watched, and commented on, taking this to heart) using ludicrous examples which I suspect must have been set up like that and articles against people hoarding anything they hadn't used regularly, (oh, didn't have to use my warm parka last year, chuck it out - just before a very cold winter, and was she sorry!) encouragement to keep as few possessions as possible in some cases - and people fell for it. It was somehow the virtuous thing to do, adding to landfills. But - Murphy's Law applies widely and as soon as you toss something, you need it, and it's either find the money to replace all of these things or do without.

Chuck your paper books and buy this gadget to read them electronically and pay to access them. Just don't break it or you have nothing to read in bed. (Reading addict, since I sleep with a cat, if I'm lucky...) And keep all of your information on the internet, where the spy agencies and random hackers can keep themselves amused with it or wipe it all out with some virus.

The only ones I could see benefiting from this 'out with the old!' theme were manufacturers, stores and, potentially, polluting industries through having old records chucked which might have caused them legal problems - and potentially some saner and life-saving regulation 'costs!!!' - down the road.

So I do have rather an anti-anti-hoarding bug in my bonnet, so to speak, and am more on the side of the Preppers in that someday, what you now have may be all you'll ever have. And it looks like I'm there already.

But while I do have some of my paternal grandfather's stamp collection, I completely lack any newspapers... what an oversight!

#6.1.2

Much as The Psychopaths/Parasites That Be would love to think of us 'norms' as incuriously bovine and accepting of even the most ludicrous propaganda ever devised, they are so out of luck. Calling us more names won't stop us thinking. Something we seem to do better than do TPTB. And that doesn't even have to say very much, since we know enough not to create an acid rain - and oceans - they're evidently too stupid to realize that they need to come out of making in the first place, simply for additional profit.

Greed is hoarding behavior, an irrational desire to collect things even at one's own peril. How many times have we read about a person (usually female) being killed by collapse of her column of bundled newspapers dating back to 1948? (And don't forget the cats!)

@on the cusp OTC: In general, I really like all your comments. But in this case, I have to disagree with you pretty strongly. If Trump is impeached it will have nothing to do with all the reasons people on this site dislike Trump. We aren't the ones impeaching him, and the ones impeaching him are entirely corrupt and untrustworthy. An impeachment, at this point, will be the establishment fixing the error of Trump slipping through somehow--probably because 1)the election was very close because Hillary is a terrible candidate that the people hate, and 2)whatever election fraud mechanisms they had in place to ensure her ascent to the White House were probably countered by someone. I don't know whether that someone was working for Trump, working independently out of a hatred of Hillary and who she actually represents, or what, but I doubt strongly they were Russians, Macedonians, or anything like that. If they were, the MIC would have found (and triumphantly presented) actual evidence of same by now. But in any case, for the first time in decades, the political, economic, and military establishments were surprised by an electoral outcome. They didn't like the experience, but that wasn't because Trump is racist, sexist, rude, cruel, inexperienced, unwilling to learn, or a buffoon; we've had racists (George W. Bush), sexists (George W. Bush and possibly Bill Clinton--I don't know whether his treatment of women arises from him thinking women are lesser, or what, and I don't care to guess), rude people (George W), cruel people (Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2, and possibly Obama), inexperienced people (Reagan and, actually, Obama--he made up for lack of experience, to some degree, with his native intelligence, which is quite high, so it mattered less than Reagan's lack of experience, which was glaring), people unwilling to learn (Reagan, George W), and buffoons (Reagan and George W). And I've only gone back to when I was twelve. If we expanded it backwards we could include Ford (a bit of a buffoon), Nixon (rude, cruel, unwilling to learn), and, well, you get the picture.

If we care about this issue, we need to ask questions like: why is he actually being impeached? who has the power that is making this happen, and what is their agenda? In my opinion, simply going "Hey, who cares, any way we can get there is OK by me cause I hate the guy!" ends up with one accepting a de facto alliance with forces like the CIA and both political parties, all of which are quite untrustworthy--to the point that, anything they plan to do is probably not good news for any of us.

Remember that the best of those who are agitating for Trump's removal endorsed, or at best silently accepted, this:

#7.1.2 I do not have an answer. I do not know what grounds for impeachment might be, but if they are good enough to get it done, I am all for it.

@on the cusp @on the cusp

Well, if he was charged in an independent international court with war crimes, he'd probably sing grand opera about everybody clear back to Reagan, but somehow I can't see that working out.

And Pence does seem even scarier - waaaaay scarier - than Trump, who at least probably wouldn't want to go back to stoning people to death for breaking religious law, which is actually possible with Pence or any other pathological religious fundamentalist. Especially one set on modeling his Vice Presidency on that of his mentor, Dick Cheney, (who enjoys the ability to have an entire country's resources behind harming/killing/dispossessing others on a global basis and is a big torture supporter,) and who may just be grooming him to take over the Presidency.

Edited for an 'and' and an 'e' which I missed.

#7.1.2 I do not have an answer. I do not know what grounds for impeachment might be, but if they are good enough to get it done, I am all for it.